Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Katody Matrass]

I guess you will conclude that I would say this. However, if I were innocent and someone else was arrested my overall emotion would be one of relief as I would be released soon. Raffaele’s statement did not express relief but a fear or concern that Guede would “say strange things”.

I guess you need to consider what Raffaele really wrote on Nov 20 and it's context. Raffaele was in jail because they had "his" bloody shoeprints. While he was there, the double DNA knife appeared.
He wrote:

Papà l’ho visto contento e sorridente, ma io per il momento non sono tranquillo al 100% in quanto ho paura che questo si inventa cose strane.​

So while his dad was all happy, he was not 100% calm. I see it as relief, but not unconditional. He already had some experience with the workings of this system.

Bloody outlines of his shoes were very damning piece of evidence. In this context the kitchen knife was a nail to the coffin. That "evidence" was all over the media. Having reservations that Guede might try to play it in his favor really was common sense.

Now in the context of being fearful of the police conjuring up evidence out of thin air, one could argue that of all those arrested in connection to Meredith’s murder that the African immigrants as an ethnic group in Italy would probably be more fearful of the police in the way that you suggest than a middle class Italian born University student.

Yes, but Guede was identified and arrested after the police found his bloody fingerprints, not before.

As for Lumumba, there was a mountain of evidence against him, too.
Phone records placing him at the cottage show he shamelessly lied about being at work at the time of murder. Phone records prove he conspired with Amanda. There were no transactions recorded that would prove he was at work. He changed inexplicably his SIM card. Even after 7 hours of interrogation the Swiss professor couldn't be sure Lumumba was at the bar all that time and he was completely unconvincing to the police. Finally, they had witness testimony against Lumumba, of course.

 

[Kaosium]

A shocking confession indeed!! - perhaps comparable only to Mick Jagger's startling public admission that HE was the gunman on the Grassy Knoll!
"I shouted out 'Who killed the Kennedys,
but after all, it was..me"

LOL!

However, Doctor, you redacted pertinent testimony on the matter, as that line in its entirety should read "...but after all, it was you and me..."

You see, that wasn't a 'confession,' it was an accusation! He pretends credit but at the end he gives it away:

"I tell you one time, you're to blame"

What do the ones who did all those horrible things have in common? They were all people--humans. The only thing the devil did in that story was confuse them as to the nature of the Hundred Year's War. After all, it's only 'Lucifer' if "heads is tails."

I do find myself thinking of that song often when contemplating this case, but mainly for another line even more relevant. After it seems to me this is a case where '...just as every cop is a criminal, and alllll the sinners saints!' being as when you look into it the cops really screwed up on this one, and while Amanda and Raffaele may not be canonized anytime soon they're just college kids, not monsters.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

I guess you need to consider what Raffaele really wrote on Nov 20 and it's context. Raffaele was in jail because they had "his" bloody shoeprints. While he was there, the double DNA knife appeared.
He wrote:

Papà l’ho visto contento e sorridente, ma io per il momento non sono tranquillo al 100% in quanto ho paura che questo si inventa cose strane.​

So while his dad was all happy, he was not 100% calm. I see it as relief, but not unconditional. He already had some experience with the workings of this system.

Bloody outlines of his shoes were very damning piece of evidence. In this context the kitchen knife was a nail to the coffin. That "evidence" was all over the media. Having reservations that Guede might try to play it in his favor really was common sense.





Yes, but Guede was identified and arrested after the police found his bloody fingerprints, not before.

As for Lumumba, there was a mountain of evidence against him, too.
Phone records placing him at the cottage show he shamelessly lied about being at work at the time of murder. Phone records prove he conspired with Amanda. There were no transactions recorded that would prove he was at work. He changed inexplicably his SIM card. Even after 7 hours of interrogation the Swiss professor couldn't be sure Lumumba was at the bar all that time and he was completely unconvincing to the police. Finally, they had witness testimony against Lumumba, of course.

Thanks for explaining the context.

So you believe Lumumba’s behaviour warranted his arrest and imprisonment based on your words “he conspired with Amanda”. You also accept telecommunications evidence that places him in the area of the cottage but no doubt reject such evidence when applied to Amanda?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

CoulsdonUK,

From the 11 November entry of Raffale’s diary (Belle Translation):
“Instead I had information that on the morning of Friday, when I was sleeping and Amanda went to take a shower at her home, she had gone also with an Argentinian guy ... I suppose, in a laundry and that this here wedged in the washing
machine the clothes including the blue Nike shoes ...”

The story about Amanda and the laundry is a bunch of warmed over bologna. I don’t know when Raffaele learned the truth, but once he did, he is well within the bounds of good sense never to trust the police again, even if it is standard operating procedure with multiple suspects. MOO.

It’s not my intention to be pedantic but the quote you included does not mention the police as Raffaele’s source of the storey of Amanda and an Argentinian guy, in fact there is no mention of the police in either diary entries. Raffaele’s statement expressing fear or concern that the arrested person he didn’t know would “say strange things”, seems odd.

Having stated the above Katody Matrass as provided more contextual information regarding Raffaele.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Does anyone have information about possible court proceedings for Saturday, 12th March?

 

[Katody Matrass]

Thanks for explaining the context.

So you believe Lumumba’s behaviour warranted his arrest and imprisonment based on your words “he conspired with Amanda”. You also accept telecommunications evidence that places him in the area of the cottage but no doubt reject such evidence when applied to Amanda?

I hope my beliefs about it are transparent to everyone.

I believe there's nothing odd in Raffaele's statement, because he's innocent. However if he was guilty it would be odd for him to openly express any concern about Guede. He would be wary to not attract any suspicions.

 

[Kaosium]

YOU CAN ALL PACK UP AND GO HOME NOW --- Knox admitted to her parents she was in Via della Pergola when Meredith Kercher was killed:

Transcript of tape recorded conversation of Amanda Knox with Curt Knox, Edda Mellas:

Amanda: Yes, there is a doctor. I took a medicine for a headache this morning, and now I feel better, but the reason I was crying yesterday is because there was this pressure on my head that wouldn’t go away because I felt horrible, this person looked at me as if I was a horrible person and I collapsed.

Edda: Like I said, the lawyers believe that they are doing it on purpose, because they sure have nothing, so they are trying to put pressure on like when they interrogated you to see if you would say something more and so you have to keep calm and do not say anything to anyone.

Amanda: Yeah, when I was in the room with him I said what? ... (Laughs) and then when I returned to my bedroom I was crying. I’m very, very worried for this thing about the knife... because there is a knife from Raffaele ...

Curt: Well, here, here, here are the facts… we talked yesterday with the lawyer and asked him about the knife. Every time that they have to review an item we have an expert there that will review it with them. This is an example of... this knife of which they are talking about, they have never notified anything about the knife.

E: So, it’s ********!

A: Is it ********?

E: It’s ********.

C: It’s complete ********. It’s a total fabrication.

E: That's what they're doing now. They are simply lying.

C: It's all a fabrication...

E: Yes, to make someone break down.

A: It’s stupid. I can’t say anything but the truth, because I know I was there. I mean, I can’t lie on this, there is no reason to do it.

C: Yeah, yeah, so what you have to do is not to talk about anything with anyone. Don’t write anything. You may receive letters. Have you received letters or anything else?

A: I'm getting loads of letters from admirers.

E: Well, people in Seattle, even your friends will start to write. They been asking me for some time, they want to send you things... probably many things can’t get through, e… but...

This kind of reminds me of that scene in "Presumed Innocent" where the desperate prosecutor tries to enter into evidence when Harrison Ford's character said sarcastically something like 'I did it, that's right I did it.' Everybody tries not to laugh as it's so lame.

In this case it's only willful misreading that leads anyone to the conclusion she was talking about the cottage. The context offered pretty much clears that up, and I'd be willing to bet even more would corroborate that. They're talking about the police putting psychological pressure on Amanda to get her to break down and tell them what they want to hear. Amanda is saying it's stupid for them to do that, as she isn't going to lie and tell them what they want, why would she incriminate herself, and she knows for sure where she was now despite them confusing her previously.

How could it make sense if she was saying there was no reason to lie about being at the cottage? That's easily falsifiable. However there is a place there's no reason for her to lie about being, and that's Raffaele's--which is where she was saying she was. That's where 'there' is to her on that night, despite their mindgames.

 

[Danceme]

Danceme.
Every bit of fact that has be put your way you keep danceing around that fact.
Do you do the tango by the way.

Are you trying to say something intelligible?

Danceme, CoulsdonUK what you're trying to argue here is really against common sense. Imagine you're in jail for the crime you have nothing to do with. You wouldn't be worried at all that police conjures evidence against you out of thin air or that the real culprit will try to blame you when caught?

I would assume I would be released once the real culprit was caught. I would be euphoric and simple hope would be what would come across in my writings.

I guess you will conclude that I would say this. However, if I were innocent and someone else was arrested my overall emotion would be one of relief as I would be released soon. Raffaele’s statement did not express relief but a fear or concern that Guede would “say strange things”.

Now in the context of being fearful of the police conjuring up evidence out of thin air, one could argue that of all those arrested in connection to Meredith’s murder that the African immigrants as an ethnic group in Italy would probably be more fearful of the police in the way that you suggest than a middle class Italian born University student.

Well put.

As for Lumumba, there was a mountain of evidence against him, too.
Phone records placing him at the cottage show he shamelessly lied about being at work at the time of murder. Phone records prove he conspired with Amanda. There were no transactions recorded that would prove he was at work. He changed inexplicably his SIM card. Even after 7 hours of interrogation the Swiss professor couldn't be sure Lumumba was at the bar all that time and he was completely unconvincing to the police. Finally, they had witness testimony against Lumumba, of course.

This would have been a great answer when everyone was arguing about why they detained Lumumba at all and for so long.

 

[Katody Matrass]

I would assume I would be released once the real culprit was caught. I would be euphoric and simple hope would be what would come across in my writings.

So you wouldn't be concerned or worried at all that the police just produced a knife linking you to the crime. That would be quite unusual and, frankly, naive.

This would have been a great answer when everyone was arguing about why they detained Lumumba at all and for so long.

CoulsdonUK suggested ILE were more likely to fabricate evidence against the blacks. I was just pointing out that ILE had mountain of evidence on Lumumba. They were not in immediate need of producing anything more to keep him jailed.

 

[Justinian2]

tronic, did you take a look at the link Dan O. posted?

What you're so excited about have been posted by Fank Sfarzo more then 2 years ago.

Here is the rest of that wiretapped conversation.

Amanda: Yes, there is a doctor. I took a medicine for a headache this morning, and now I feel better, but the reason I was crying yesterday evening is because there was this pressure on my head that wouldn’t go away because I felt horrible, this person looked at me as if I was a horrible person and I collapsed.
Edda: Like I said, the lawyers believe that they are doing it on purpose, because they have nothing at all, so they are trying to put pressure on like when they interrogated you to see if you would say something more and so you have to keep calm and do not say anything to anyone.
[...]
Amanda: Is it ********?
Edda: It’s ********.
Curt: It’s complete ********. It’s a total fabrication.
Edda: That's what they're doing now. They are simply lying.
Curt: It's all a fabrication...
Edda: Yes, to make someone break down.

Obviously those in the know are positive the prosecution's case is pure BS regardless of what the prosecution thinks Amanda intimated with "I was there".

What people forget is that Amanda, Rafaele and Guede are the experts on what happened.

 

[katy_did]

In this case it's only willful misreading that leads anyone to the conclusion she was talking about the cottage. The context offered pretty much clears that up, and I'd be willing to bet even more would corroborate that. They're talking about the police putting psychological pressure on Amanda to get her to break down and tell them what they want to hear. Amanda is saying it's stupid for them to do that, as she isn't going to lie and tell them what they want, why would she incriminate herself, and she knows for sure where she was now despite them confusing her previously.

Beat me to it.

That was my interpretation as well (I had a whole post on it but it's sort of superfluous now ).

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the meaning of Amanda's words

That was my interpretation as well (I had a whole post on it but it's sort of superfluous now ).

katy_did,

Katody Mattrass and I started out along the line of thinking that Amanda was talking about the pressure to say something false (that she was at her flat), and Kaosium has done a really good job in fleshing it out. In the comments section at Perugia Shock Charlie Wilkes wrote, "Obviously she had every reason to deny being at the crime scene. If seizing on the vagueness of a pronoun is not the sign of a weak case, I don't know what it." But feel free to add your thoughts; you'll probably say it better than any of us.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

no idea

It’s not my intention to be pedantic but the quote you included does not mention the police as Raffaele’s source of the storey of Amanda and an Argentinian guy, in fact there is no mention of the police in either diary entries. Raffaele’s statement expressing fear or concern that the arrested person he didn’t know would “say strange things”, seems odd.

Having stated the above Katody Matrass as provided more contextual information regarding Raffaele.

CoulsdonUK,
Based on p. 194 of Murder in Italy, it sounds as if a witness said to the police that there were two people in a laundromat. Somehow the information got out and Amanda became one of the two people. Sollecito's family told him the rumor. I have, ahem, no idea who leaked the information in the first place. MOO.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

It’s not my intention to be pedantic but the quote you included does not mention the police as Raffaele’s source of the storey of Amanda and an Argentinian guy, in fact there is no mention of the police in either diary entries. Raffaele’s statement expressing fear or concern that the arrested person he didn’t know would “say strange things”, seems odd.

Having stated the above Katody Matrass as provided more contextual information regarding Raffaele.

Try and look at this from both sides,

Say Raff is innocent - I would think his reaction would be along the same lines as his fathers, very happy, who probably at this time believes his son to be innocent. At last, they have caught the man responsible, now they can set me free.

Say Raff is guilty and this guy they have caught is the right guy - Raff would know this and yes, he should fear what this guy has to say.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Try and look at this from both sides,

Say Raff is innocent - I would think his reaction would be along the same lines as his fathers, very happy, who probably at this time believes his son to be innocent. At last, they have caught the man responsible, now they can set me free.

Say Raff is guilty and this guy they have caught is the right guy - Raff would know this and yes, he should fear what this guy has to say.

That assumes Raffaele is so thick that he is sitting in his jail cell totally unaware that he's being railroaded, in absolute faith that the Perugia police would let him go the second they found a better suspect.

Whereas if he's bright enough to suspect by this point that the ILE might try to stick to their original fairy story (facts they already knew to be true and all that) despite new evidence that would cause rational people to update their beliefs, then worry about what Guede will say is perfectly rational.

I think you need to be really, really cautious about jumping to assumptions about people's psychological nature and state. When you have a lot invested in a pet theory, as you do, it's terribly easy to find yourself sneaking in assumptions consistent with your pet theory without examining them critically first.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

That assumes Raffaele is so thick that he is sitting in his jail cell totally unaware that he's being railroaded, in absolute faith that the Perugia police would let him go the second they found a better suspect.

Whereas if he's bright enough to suspect by this point that the ILE might try to stick to their original fairy story (facts they already knew to be true and all that) despite new evidence that would cause rational people to update their beliefs, then worry about what Guede will say is perfectly rational.

I think you need to be really, really cautious about jumping to assumptions about people's psychological nature and state. When you have a lot invested in a pet theory, as you do, it's terribly easy to find yourself sneaking in assumptions consistent with your pet theory without examining them critically first.

Sorry, but thats makes no sense at all, except to a FOAK'er I suppose, why would Raff feel any different than his father felt if he were innocent - no sense at all. Raff thinks he's being railroaded, but his dad does not? This case is a lot simpler than some of you may think. If Raff were innocent, there would be no better news than what he just received, the real killer has been caught...... If he is guilty, he knows it and he should fear what the other killer may say. Period....

 

[colonelhall]

Katody Matrass: "I believe there's nothing odd in Raffaele's statement, because he's innocent."

You can explain every single piece of incriminating evidence in this way. The fact is that he has been found guilty!

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Sorry, but thats makes no sense at all, except to a FOAK'er I suppose, why would Raff feel any different than his father felt if he were innocent - no sense at all. Raff thinks he's being railroaded, but his dad does not? This case is a lot simpler than some of you may think. If Raff were innocent, there would be no better news than what he just received, the real killer has been caught...... If he is guilty, he knows it and he should fear what the other killer may say. Period....

On one hand we have folk-psychological guesswork from someone who wasn't there, doesn't know the people involved and does not have mind reading powers.

On the other hand we have hard evidence in the form of the autopsy data and computer records that show that there was human activity on Raffaele's computer before, during and after the time when Meredith was murdered.

You may think you have mind-reading super-powers such that you can make the whole case "a lot simpler than some of you may think" by applying folk-psychological guesswork based on second-or-third-hand reports of the people involved and their situations.

However rational people are going to believe that the laws of physics followed their usual course on the night Meredith was murdered.

It sounds to me as if the person you are really trying to convince is yourself. Can you really not even imagine the possibility that Raffaele took a more pessimistic view of the situation than his father just because he was in prison and that tends to make people feel negative? Can you absolutely rule out the possibility that because Raffaele is not a clone of his father he might form different opinions based on the same data?

 

[bri1]

Sorry, but thats makes no sense at all, except to a FOAK'er I suppose, why would Raff feel any different than his father felt if he were innocent - no sense at all. Raff thinks he's being railroaded, but his dad does not? This case is a lot simpler than some of you may think. If Raff were innocent, there would be no better news than what he just received, the real killer has been caught...... If he is guilty, he knows it and he should fear what the other killer may say. Period....

I would argue that not only was it in Guede's self-interest to lie and to implicate RS and AK, but that it was in his character. He was not a guy who could take responsibility and had already demonstrated his desire to get away with what he'd done scot-free, by leaving the country. Raff knew both of these things when he made the statement in his diary.
And what do you think the 'rational' way would be for Raffaele to respond to Guede's arrest at this point, if we made the assumption that Raff is guilty?

 

[Justinian2]

Katody Matrass: "I believe there's nothing odd in Raffaele's statement, because he's innocent."

You can explain every single piece of incriminating evidence in this way. The fact is that he has been found guilty!

With your attitude, I don't know how you could ever fight a speeding ticket and win? Have you?

I haven't lost recently. But then I don't fight lost causes.

A lawyer once told me that to win, you need a winnable case, a good lawyer and a lot of money.

In other words, if you have a winnable case but an average lawyer and insufficient resources, then you are found guilty. This is what the world foists off as 'justice'.